Fwd: Research regarding why catchphrases catch on

[Kathleen E. Miller]

If anyone is interested.


>Subject: Research regarding why catchphrases catch on
>Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:18:19 -0700
>From: "Berger, Jonah Arkin" <Berger_Jonah at gsb.stanford.edu>
>To: <millerk at nytimes.com>
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Oct 2004 18:18:20.0116 (UTC)
>
>Mrs. Miller:
>
>Loved your recent article regarding the use of "izzle" and thought you
>might be interested in some forthcoming research regarding factors that
>influence the success of ideas such as catchphrases, names, etc.
>
>It's particularly relevant to the current presidential election.
>
>Thanks for your time, and if you are interested, I'd love to provide you
>with more information.
>
>Sincerely,
>Jonah Berger
>
>------------------------
>Doctoral Candidate
>Stanford University Graduate School of Business
>berger_jonah at gsb.stanford.edu
>415-305-6971
>
>ole0.bmp
>  Why Some Ideas Catch On While Others Fade Away
>October 2004
>
>
>Research by
>
>Jonah Berger Doctoral Candidate
>
>Chip Heath Associate Professor of Organizational Behavior
>
>STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS - Political catchphrases fly around
>every campaign season, and this year has been no different.  George Bush
>calls John Kerry a "flip-flopper;" John Kerry talks about "two
>Americas."  While these two phrases have roots in the current political
>discourse, they have also leaked into everyday vernacular.  But why do
>certain political catchphrase stick and become part of our lexicon while
>others do not?
>
>According to Jonah Berger and Chip Heath, researchers at Stanford
>University's Graduate School of Business, one key influencer of an idea's
>success is the prevalence of its habitat, or how well it fits with the
>surrounding environment.  Just as the population of a given animal varies
>with availability of the environmental factors (food and shelter) it needs
>to survive, Berger and Heath suggest that the success of ideas depends on
>the prevalence of cues in the environment that cause people to think
>about, and possibly use them.
>
>For example, if a given catchphrase happens to be cued by bananas, then
>people should be more likely to use that catchphrase in times or places
>where there are more bananas, or other people are talking about
>bananas.  Similarly, if an environment is full of bananas, but pretty
>devoid of pineapples, then ideas that are cued by bananas should be more
>successful than ideas cued by pineapples.
>
>In a number of studies, Berger and Heath found that the prevalence of
>ideas (whether they be political catchphrases, rumors, proverbs, etc.)
>varied with the prevalence of their habitat.  Appearance of a rumor
>suggesting Microsoft would give $1000 to people for forwarding an e-mail
>varied over time depending on how much attention the news media gave to
>Bill Gates.  In months when more newspaper articles mentioned Gates,
>whether in connection with Microsoft or only his personal life, the rumor
>appeared more frequently in internet newsgroups; when the media paid less
>attention to Gates, the rumor appeared less frequently.
>
>They found similar effects when examining the success of two political
>catchphrases-- fuzzy math and lockbox--from the 2000 presidential
>election.  Al Gore used the term "lockbox" to talk about preventing
>Medicare and Social Security money from being spent elsewhere; George W.
>Bush invoked the notion of "fuzzy math" to criticize the calculations
>underlying Gore's plans.  Both terms were discussed in relation to the
>election, but Berger and Heath found that the phrases' relative success in
>spreading beyond politics depended on the prevalence of their habitats.
>
>Even before the extremely close election had been decided, "fuzzy math"
>appeared almost 3 times more frequently than "lockbox" in newspaper
>articles, appearing in articles about everything from sports to transit
>strikes.  But why was "fuzzy math" relatively more successful?  The notion
>of habitats suggests looking to the environment: occasions where
>calculations seem a bit fuzzy are more frequent than occasions where
>something needs to be put away for safekeeping.  Consequently, there are
>more cues for "fuzzy math" and more occasions to trot out the
>phrase.  Thus, one reason for fuzzy math's relative success may have been
>the prevalence of its habitat.
>
>When thinking about how likely an idea is to succeed, we often focus on
>the credibility or status of the communicator, but this research suggests
>also examining the fit between the idea and the surrounding
>environment.  People may be more likely to take the ideas of great
>communicators seriously, but the communicator will not be there to guide
>the idea through its diffusion.  In crafting ideas that will stick
>(whether they be political catchphrases, brand names, or product slogans),
>attention to the surrounding environment may make the difference between
>something that's hot and something that flops.
>
>Idea Habitats: How the Prevalence of Environmental Cues Influences the
>Success of Ideas.
>Jonah A. Berger and Chip Heath
>forthcoming, Cognitive Science
>
>Related Research
>Emotional Selection in Memes: The Case of Urban Legends.
>Chip Heath, Chris Bell, and Emily Sternberg
>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001
>
>
>